> because I've realized our business model isn't what I thought it was when I joined, and that engineering really is a cost center past a certain baseline, which explains the utterly mediocre equipment/procedures ...
This is a good point. I am seeing about same thing at work. Over obsession with Agile processes, tracking hours, third rate light duty computers, rigid working hours and so on. Many good engineers have already left instead banging head against "process" wall. And funnily today managers saying on call that they are finding difficult to hire and people are leaving left and right.
Here's the reality that took me waaaay too long to accept: some companies are optimizing for mediocrity.
Mediocrity (often achieved through process) has cold advantages:
- It's cheaper because you're paying people less.
- It's more resilient because people are easier to replace.
- It's more predictable because you're not asking for groundbreaking work.
- Etc... you get the idea.
The only real downside is you're not going to build an exceptional product. But here's the rub: not every product needs to be exceptional in every way. Thus most departments in a company are perfectly fine with mediocrity.
My company held an all hands and when someone asked about the salary based attrition this is basically what the response was. And I believe it. It certainly seems like the company is geared toward attracting mediocre talent for mediocre pay and letting them slide by for 40 years. The company inevitably comes out ahead when inflation eats away your salary.
This is a good point. I am seeing about same thing at work. Over obsession with Agile processes, tracking hours, third rate light duty computers, rigid working hours and so on. Many good engineers have already left instead banging head against "process" wall. And funnily today managers saying on call that they are finding difficult to hire and people are leaving left and right.